ESQ wrote:So by pursuing this lawsuit, Moore has forfeited $750,000 in insurance payouts. When you factor in the disbursements, costs, and his lawyer's 1/3 of any damages, he probably needs an award around $2 million to come out ahead. Had he succeeded in having the case heard in Colorado, he would have easily settled for far more than that, but in Canada he`ll be lucky to get that kind of award.

LotusBlossom wrote:The only thing that's really shitty about the whole damn thing is the Canucks are now possibly going to be on the hook for the actions of one person.

So who is on the hook, regarding the "person" known as Vancouver Canucks? The Aquillinis or McCaw? ...seems odd that the lawsuit can be against McCaw...and McCaw is "responsible"...and then he can sell his team and someone who wasn't even on the scene is now responsible. I'm sure this was dealt with at the time of sale but its still a strange situation.

it would be identified as an outstanding liability and was likely factored into the balance sheet

dhabums wrote:I applaud your bravado. But I bet if your livelihood is taken away from you due to a criminal act, you will consider and then definitely pursue legal action.

"definitely"

So anyone/everyone in Steve Moore's situation would choose legal action?

To be fair, only half the population is above average intelligence so I won't try to speak for the other. I am surprised how many people here are prepared to surrender their rights as Canadians in the name of being old school. Maybe some of have nothing as it is and wouldn't be losing out if a career as head fry cook was forfeited.

I do not expect anyone here to share their opinion of what they'd do if they were Steve Moore because nobody here is in his situation. Unless of course CC has a Harvard grad and NHL player as a member. I'd listen to them with interest. I don't know what you do, but if tomorrow it is taken from you due to a criminally negligent act that meant everything you have worked for was gone, you BETTER be considering litigation.

Thats assuming it was "taken" away and not traded away for a golden ticket. Bertuzzi, Brian Burke and Vancouver Canucks are certain to argue that point. Did he make an honest attempt to return? ...or did he hop on the lawsuit train a tad prematurely? If I recall correctly, there was a window of opportunity to have it heard in Colorado so he went for it, even though that wasn't successful.

I'm not a football fan, but people on here compared his injury to several that happened in that sport. In all the cases mentioned the players were able to return, one guy the same season. Lets also not forget it was Lacroix who had him "airlifted" out of Vancouver then propped him up for the press conference in a neck brace and also threw out the misleading"broken neck" claim. Imo, all Lacroix wanted was to use Moore to ensure Bertuzzi was gone for the playoffs. Mission accomplished. It would have happened anyway, but Lacroix turned this thing into a 3-ring circus and started Moore off on the wrong path. After he was used up Lacroix tossed him out like last week's newspaper.

ClamRussel wrote:Thats assuming it was "taken" away and not traded away for a golden ticket. Bertuzzi, Brian Burke and Vancouver Canucks are certain to argue that point. Did he make an honest attempt to return? ...or did he hop on the lawsuit train a tad prematurely? If I recall correctly, there was a window of opportunity to have it heard in Colorado so he went for it, even though that wasn't successful.

I'm not a football fan, but people on here compared his injury to several that happened in that sport. In all the cases mentioned the players were able to return, one guy the same season. Lets also not forget it was Lacroix who had him "airlifted" out of Vancouver then propped him up for the press conference in a neck brace and also threw out the misleading"broken neck" claim. Imo, all Lacroix wanted was to use Moore to ensure Bertuzzi was gone for the playoffs. Mission accomplished. It would have happened anyway, but Lacroix turned this thing into a 3-ring circus and started Moore off on the wrong path. After he was used up Lacroix tossed him out like last week's newspaper.

I have no idea what Lacroix's BS moves have to do with anything regarding Moore's right to litigation. It was almost as entertaining as the tears Bertuzzi shed though. The "broken neck" crap was embarrassing to hockey and a ridiculous stunt. The "long arm of the law" crap was a ridiculous stunt. Neither however prevent Moore from having the right to pursue compensation. I have no idea if Moore make a real attempt to return. But if he is STILL suffering from PCS then he shouldn't even be trying.

As for comparing injuries, that doesn't interest me. It's a brain injury. Maybe having one that works well makes it tougher to recover. I just don't buy the idea that a guy who plays hockey his whole life and finally makes the NHL would decide to not go back to roll the legal dice. I understand why some Canucks fans hold on dearly to the idea that Moore is the villain in this story. Remember the kids at the courthouse holding "Free Bertuzzi" signs? Those are the people I think of. I can't believe so many of them are members here.

I get it though, if anyone here has their life forever altered by a criminally negligent act, they'd just walk it off. Old time hockey!!!

Unquestionably Moore has the right to sue Bertuzzi et al. The pre case details I'm speculating have past the test of detrmining if there is a case to answer to.

So that acepted here's the problem as I see it. The Moore Camp has to prove that the injury was a result of the punch from Bertuzzi that caused the damage and not the piling on, almost simultaneously to the punch. Can any one identify when the injury occurred....that's what Moore and his hired help need to show...not 50-50, but that was the 100% determining factor. I have to think that will be tough

ClamRussel wrote:Thats assuming it was "taken" away and not traded away for a golden ticket.

Somewhat hilariously, Burke offered Moore a contract when he was in Anaheim to try to prove that Moore could still play and mitigate the damages ! That is an asshole maneuver of Burkian proportions right there.

Personally, I do not have a problem with what Moore is doing. I hope he suffers for it and doesn't get a massive windfall, but he has a right to his day in court. He played hockey to make money, just like all of us spend most of our lives trying to make money. How he can't make money playing hockey, so he's trying to do it another way. He probably sincerely wishes he had never headhunted Naslund, but that's not going to change what happened to him. Now that I've looked into the insurance thing and seen what shitty circumstances he found himself in, I can totally understand why he sued. Not only was he on a one-year deal (so he only got paid out the rest of the contract and was then released), but he was one game away from an extra $150k of insurance. When you spend your life training to do one thing, and have that one thing taken away from you when you are 26, you have to do something drastic.

But I agree that he is making himself out to be very unsympathetic. With this lawsuit, the discussion will be about what kind of player he was, how much blame/liability he takes for what happened, why didn't he man up and fight Bertuzzi, how long would his scrub career have lasted, etc. etc. I imagine a lot of people who were sympathetic to him are starting to turn on him much like people here.

One guy gets elbowed in the head, or is it on the head? IN the head sound really messy no? Another guy who happens to be the elbowed victim's tight buddy gets even by attacking the elbow deliverer. No one playing games for money deserves to have bones broken but it happens. to me, that is all this is. A hockey play that has got out of control due to media. I was alright with the play when it happened. In all honesty, I thought to myself that Moore had it coming. Then Iwent back and watched a few times. It was ugly but Bert did not have replay. He was pissed his friend got hurt and did payback. I would do the same and have. just not under the media glare. The poster who said Naslund was never the same was right. Their fringe player took out our captain and our star. The response, while ugly is totally understandable. Of course it depends whose team you support. There is no fairness is violence. Anyone who has been around a lot of it sees violence as often shameful. This is hockey, not war. In the end Moore should sue his own team for letting him or encouraging him to do it.

dhabums wrote:I applaud your bravado. But I bet if your livelihood is taken away from you due to a criminal act, you will consider and then definitely pursue legal action.

Strangelove wrote:"definitely"

So anyone/everyone in Steve Moore's situation would choose legal action?

dhabums wrote:To be fair, only half the population is above average intelligence so I won't try to speak for the other.

Ummmm TOO LATE.

dhabums wrote:I do not expect anyone here to share their opinion of what they'd do if they were Steve Moore because nobody here is in his situation.

Well YOU shared your opinion of wot YOU'D do, didn't you?

In fact you spoke for everyone when you said "definitely"

(rather than say take the $750K insurance money and put that Harvard education to work)

dhabums wrote:I don't know what you do, but if tomorrow it is taken from you due to a criminally negligent act that meant everything you have worked for was gone, you BETTER be considering litigation.

So you've gone from: one would... definitely pursue legal action

To: one best consider legal action.

I have no problem with Steve Moore's lawsuit btw, I just hate the self-centred three-ring-circus NHL-damaging approach he took. Steve Moore has every right to sue Todd Bertuzzi and I'd probably do the same thing in his situation (although the guaranteed $750K to a career-fringe-NHLer + the options a Harvard education presents = might be tempting). I like to think though, that I'd do it with less ballyhoo and more class. I also like to think I'd never put myself in that situation in the first place because I wouldn't go around injuring NHL superstars (Naslund and Martin St. Louis) with cheapshots as a rookie.

The thing with concussions is, it's based purely on the individual and how he/she recovers from one.

I don't know how much compensation Moore will get or should have from the incident, but as someone who has suffered from a couple of concussions in my lifetime, and seeing a few others deal with PCS, including my daughter this past year, it is really entirely how an individual's body deals with the symptoms and the severity of it all. The minute I saw my kid get pushed to the floor and her head bounced off the court, I knew she probably had one. It was that hard. I hated that kid and her parent that was present at the game. If I could I would have torn the bitch (the kid's mom) limb from limb.

Unfortunately, I can't sue the kid (or her parents) that gave my daughter a concussion during a basketball game, but if I could, I might consider it. My daughter, although much better now, missed a quarter of her soccer season because of that injury. However, after two months after she suffered from a Grade II concussion, she was still feeling the aftermath of dizzy spells, vomiting and feeling like her equilibrium was always teetering from normal. From time to time when she is done with dance class, she feels light-headed, which she never used to pre-concussion.

The severity of Moore's concussion (I believe it is a Grade IIIb) has apparently left him with permanent brain damage and he cannot function normally on a day to day basis. That's a pretty insane level of damage that was inflicted from the incident.

I don't like Steve Moore, and I don't think much of Bertuzzi these days, but I guess to answer dbhabum's question of if we were put in that situation to think about legal action and possible compensation because I can no longer be 'normal', I'd definitely think about it, no question. Steve thought about it, with counsel from his family, friends and experts (lawyers and doctors) and has decided to pursue litigation in the matter.

That whole put yourself in Steve's and his parents' shoes for a moment thought became a reality for me when I saw my child go down with a concussion. So would I sue? I would have considered it.

If that were me back in 2004, I would have taken that $750K and tried to find ways to make it work for me, but that's just me, I'm not Steve Moore. I'm just a single parent who is trying to provide the best possible life for myself and my family with the abilities I have. I don't have a law degree like Steve, but I do just fine.

Fred wrote:Unquestionably Moore has the right to sue Bertuzzi et al. The pre case details I'm speculating have past the test of detrmining if there is a case to answer to.

So that acepted here's the problem as I see it. The Moore Camp has to prove that the injury was a result of the punch from Bertuzzi that caused the damage and not the piling on, almost simultaneously to the punch. Can any one identify when the injury occurred....that's what Moore and his hired help need to show...not 50-50, but that was the 100% determining factor. I have to think that will be tough

The winner, and STILL king of the world of misinformation and outright incorrectness, is Fred!!!!!!

I am rather new to the site Fred, so maybe I don't understand some of the board history. Is your job to incite conversation by being wrong in every thread you submit your thoughts to?

Please let's play nice. It's not fun having to read every single post to make sure we're not going overboard on the personal insults. Opinions vary, right or wrong, they just do.

dhabums wrote:I applaud your bravado. But I bet if your livelihood is taken away from you due to a criminal act, you will consider and then definitely pursue legal action.

Strangelove wrote:"definitely"

So anyone/everyone in Steve Moore's situation would choose legal action?

dhabums wrote:To be fair, only half the population is above average intelligence so I won't try to speak for the other.

Ummmm TOO LATE.

dhabums wrote:I do not expect anyone here to share their opinion of what they'd do if they were Steve Moore because nobody here is in his situation.

Well YOU shared your opinion of wot YOU'D do, didn't you?

In fact you spoke for everyone when you said "definitely"

(rather than say take the $750K insurance money and put that Harvard education to work)

dhabums wrote:I don't know what you do, but if tomorrow it is taken from you due to a criminally negligent act that meant everything you have worked for was gone, you BETTER be considering litigation.

So you've gone from: one would... definitely pursue legal action

To: one best consider legal action.

I have no problem with Steve Moore's lawsuit btw, I just hate the self-centred three-ring-circus NHL-damaging approach he took. Steve Moore has every right to sue Todd Bertuzzi and I'd probably do the same thing in his situation (although the guaranteed $750K to a career-fringe-NHLer + the options a Harvard education presents = might be tempting). I like to think though, that I'd do it with less ballyhoo and more class. I also like to think I'd never put myself in that situation in the first place because I wouldn't go around injuring NHL superstars (Naslund and Martin St. Louis) with cheapshots as a rookie.

Todd Bertuzzi is the villain in this story.

Steve Moore is just a weasel.

Put his education to work? Isn't the serious case of PCS part of his issue? A friend of mine working on her PhD suffered a pretty bad concussion playing the violent sport of curling. She had to take a year and a half off because she couldn't concentrate for more the 10 minutes without getting a headache. Moore claims to still be having PCS issues, so putting that Harvard education to work (or more likely continuing it) seems to be a problem. Although it is much easier to just make up your mind and cheer for the home team. I get it.

The "career fringe NHLer" comment and similar are based on what? Making the NHL in his 3rd year out of college playing for a great team? (this is where someone tells me the Avs had injuries as if it was a secret) While he may not have had a long career, its not like he was a walk on at camp with no possibility at playing in the league. I'd take his 5 goals in his last season over great 4th liners like Glass who is "fringing" into his 4th season as an NHLer. And those 5 came in a horrid year for scoring. Playing today he might have scored 5.5 or even 6!

Fred wrote:Unquestionably Moore has the right to sue Bertuzzi et al. The pre case details I'm speculating have past the test of detrmining if there is a case to answer to.

So that acepted here's the problem as I see it. The Moore Camp has to prove that the injury was a result of the punch from Bertuzzi that caused the damage and not the piling on, almost simultaneously to the punch. Can any one identify when the injury occurred....that's what Moore and his hired help need to show...not 50-50, but that was the 100% determining factor. I have to think that will be tough

The winner, and STILL king of the world of misinformation and outright incorrectness, is Fred!!!!!!

I am rather new to the site Fred, so maybe I don't understand some of the board history. Is your job to incite conversation by being wrong in every thread you submit your thoughts to?

.[/quote]

dhabums who ever you are, you're making visiting this forum a real pain in the a$$, who the Hell are you to decide who's correct or not, who appointed you. Get over yourself, there's no pleasure posting when you decide to sensor others and make some snide comments